Background Diagnosis of pulmonary hypertension (PH) is often delayed or missed, leading to disease progression and missed treatment opportunities. In this study, we measured variation in care provided by board-certified cardiologists and pulmonologists in simulated patients with potentially undiagnosed PH. Methods and Results In a cross-sectional study (https://www.clinicaltrials.gov, NCT04693793), 219 US practicing cardiologists and pulmonologists cared for simulated patients presenting with symptoms of chronic dyspnea and associated signs of potential PH. We scored the clinical quality-of-care decisions made in a clinical encounter against predetermined evidence-based criteria. Overall, quality-of-care scores ranged from 18% to 74%, averaging 43.2%±11.5%. PH, when present, was correctly suspected 49.1% of the time. Conversely, physicians incorrectly identified PH in 53.7% of non-PH cases. Physicians ordered 2-dimensional echocardiography in just 64.3% of cases overall. Physicians who ordered 2-dimensional echocardiography in the PH cases were significantly more likely to get the presumptive diagnosis (61.9% versus 30.7%; P<0.001). Ordering other diagnostic work-up items showed similar results for ventilation/perfusion scan (81.5% versus 51.4%; P=0.005) and high-resolution computed tomography (60.4% versus 43.2%; P=0.001). Physicians who correctly identified PH were significantly more likely to order confirmatory right heart catheterization or refer to PH center (67.3% versus 15.8%; P<0.001). Conclusions A wide range of care in the clinical practice among simulated patients presenting with possible PH was found, specifically in the evaluation and plan for definitive diagnosis of patients with PH. The delay or misdiagnosis of PH is likely attributed to a low clinical suspicion, nonspecific symptoms, and underuse of key diagnostic tests. Registration URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT04693793.
Keywords: cardiology; clinical practice; practice variation; pulmonary hypertension; pulmonology.